Discussion:Chronologie dans les histoires de Don Rosa/@comment-28061268-20160401150157/@comment-28061268-20160402115733
"…aren't you the Anonymous from the "Duck Comics Revue" coments ?": I am, and I came here after Achille Talon (is it you?) reported this page to me a week ago. "The quote shall indeed be added to the article (I'll take care of the translating)": thanks for that. "but it won't change our timeline": I think it's a little early to declare this discussion closed, considering it just started. Are there other users here who want to give use their opinion? "because the author's original intent is what matters": so you say that, and yet you also say that Picsou Wiki should place "A Little Something Special" in 1962 instead of 1952 in a page that is called "Chronologie dans les histoires de Don Rosa"? This is very misleading for readers: I'm not saying everyone should "believe" in Rosa's timeline, but in a page dedicated Rosa's timeline we should explain how it works. For other views of the timeline there is already Chronologie de l'univers de Donald Duck. It's not just "A Little Something Special", there are many Rosa stories that would be placed well after Rosa meant to be placed if we use your method. And how do you deal with "Gyro's First Invention", where one of the main point of the story is that Barks' 10-pager with the Cornelius Coot statue contest happen before "A Christmas for Shacktown" even though the 10-pager was published after "A Christmas for Shacktown"? "What Don Rosa says on the matter ... cannot be taken into account, canonically speaking": so, a page that from its title is meant to explain how the timeline of the Don Rosa continuity works should be written by assuming that what Don Rosa says on the matter (both in his stories and in interviews) cannot be taken into account? I don't see how this makes any sense at all. Plus, if we say Barks' stories happen when they were published, then there would be no point at all in having a list that explains when they happen in-universe, as the list would be redundant to the list of his stories with the publication date. And if what Don Rosa says on the matter cannot be taken into account, then why can as well decide that his stories happen in the 1980's, 1990's and 2000's and that what he says about them happening in the 1950's cannot be taken into account. Is this going to happen to this page? I surely hope not. "Besides, we have no need for an explanation as to how the nephews did not age and whatnot, because we also take various post-1967 stories (such as the "Millenium Orbs" series) into account": really? In the section "Hypothèses de dates des histoires de Don Rosa" I can only see stories by Barks and Rosa, and I doubt stories by other authors will be added, as that would defeat the whole purpose of the article being about "Chronologie dans les histoires de Don Rosa", as the title says. "About "Donald's 60th Birthday": of course the original version is what matters. We will change it right away": I am glad you will change it, though I hope that the principle "the original version is what matters" will be followed for "A Little Something Special" too. "As for "Chrismtas on Bear Mountain" ... I guess I'll edit that for precision's sake": thank you for that too. It is indeed a minor imprecision, but it is better to have no imprecisions rather than a minor imprecision. After all, the main point of Lo$ part 12 is that it is a midquel of "Christmas of Bear Mountain", not a sequel.